|
||
How Many Americans Understand Hillary?
A note of personal disgust to Hillary Clinton's remarks concerning NAFTA in the Boston Globe:
"With NAFTA, Bill and Hillary Clinton really stuck it to rural America, Mudcat told me, though in slightly more graphic terms. So when Clinton visited the Globe this week I asked her about that charge...Clinton, however, wasn't about to get into a hissing match with a Mudcat. 'I understand politics, so I understand making charges, but I don't think the evidence is there to support that,' she concluded." Scott Lehigh's column, Boston Globe, October 12, 2007Is there anybody out there who would dare question that Hillary Clinton understands politics? I certainly do not. I have never, never heard, nor will I ever, ever say that the Clintons don't understand politics. Everybody on the planet knows they are the standard of measure in the practice of politics. So you just read her comment in the October 12 edition of The Boston Globe, "I don't think the evidence is there to support that." To highlight Hillary's impeccable understanding of politics, let's move back four days to her statement in USA Today for the supporting evidence (from the horse's mouth) on NAFTA's devastation to rural and blue-collar America.
"I think we do need to take a deep breath and figure out how we can make it (NAFTA) work for the greatest number of people," she told USA Today. Clinton said NAFTA's benefits have gone to the wealthy and cost jobs for working people. Susan Page, USA Today, October 8, 2007First, it is callous and offensive to the many Americans who have been "sucking wind" due to Clinton trade policies for Hillary to tell them "to take a deep breath." Secondly, Hillary, you want more "supporting evidence" other than your own statement? Top-tier economists, many who were tricked on these ill-thought, ill-negotiated, ill-enforced, and erroneously presented to Congress trade treaties, are now taking a second look themselves. Former Clinton official and Berkeley economist Brad DeLong, Clinton Treasury secretary Larry Summers, Nobel laureate Paul Samuelson, and a former vice chair of the Fed, Princeton's Alan Blinder, have all voiced strong concerns. Blinder has gone so far as to argue that off shoring and outsourcing of American jobs could ship away as many as 40 million jobs in the next two decades.
The reason Hillary is distancing herself from the trade treaties, rather than continuing to talk about ridiculous "unintended consequences," is because she "understands politics" like nobody else. In the early primary states, Iowa and South Carolina have lost twice as many jobs to NAFTA than they gained, and in New Hampshire, they have lost two-and-a-half times more jobs than they gained. The bottom line is that the Clintons did a number on small-town rural America and blue-collared workers everywhere. To get in tight with the big boys, they brokered a deal to trade local economies, jobs, and benefits (code word: healthcare) for Wall Street dividends. I think the greatest verifier to the validity of that last statement is on the cover of Fortune back in July. The headline over a posed shot of Hillary says "BUSINESS LOVES HILLARY! WHO KNEW IT?" I'll tell you who knows it. Many, many rural and blue-collared Americans know it. That cover is a perfect illustration as to why Hillary can not win the general election and why the collateral damage to the down ticket of her toxic coat-tails could cost us Congress. The question is not whether Hillary "understands politics," but instead, how many of us understand Hillary.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
You know if you think anything happens in Washington by accident or "ill-conceived" you're very naive. Its just like Bush playing "bumbling-hick-Texan" yet he does whatever he wants and people just laugh and say how "dumb" he is! Who's really dumb here?
Did Hillary understand Sundays vote on CAFTA?
Our government is threatening other nations with
trade isolation if they do not ratify it. Talk
about strong arm tactics!
I really don't want to get caught up in another "anyone but George Bush" election -that's what got us stuck with John Kerry as the most "electable" alternative. And I would choose to call myself a feminist - someday I'd love to see a woman lead this nation. So it pains me to say .. loud and clear .. not this one.
For me the overarching theme in the next series of elections will be about Balance - the Balance of Power and the Balance of various Rights. We are already talking about the right balance of power between the Executive and the Legislature. We're beginning to talk about the right balance between the need to collect intelligence and civil liberties. But we haven't even begun ... well maybe John Edwards and Andy Stern have ... to discuss the proper balance of power between the rights of global corporations and the rights of individuals.
At some point we are going to have to address the issue of Corporate Personhood, and the obscene imbalance it has helped to create that now lies between the rich and the rest of us, corporations and private individuals. The culture of Greed and Separation that has grown under the banner of the "Shock Doctrine" and "free enterprise" has created an astonishing level of misery for everyone - rich and poor.
And when the moment comes when we are willing to put this on the table, name it, and begin to deal, we will need someone in the White House who has not sold her soul to corporate interests years ago. I don't believe ... I wish I did ... that Hillary Clinton possesses either the wherewithal or the intention of ever buying her soul back.
If she is chosen as the Democratic candidate for President in 2008, I shall refrain from voting for the first time in decades. I won't resign from working for social justice in other ways, but I will reluctantly conclude that the Democratic Party has chosen to be a part of the problem and not a part of the solution ... and unworthy of any support.
we are stuck between a rock, and a hard place! we are not going to have anyone to vote for.they all take money from drug/insurance lobbyists lets find a way to take the country from the special interest groups if they actually had some worth a sxxx to vote for maybe the people would vote again they just keep giving us the choice between two losers and the lesser of two evils wins lets not settle for that any more email the Candidates tell them the way you feel maybe if enough people e mail them they will notice.
swkidder
You could not be more right. My wife and I are also sick and tired of having Hillary shoved down our throats. We simply refuse to join this well-funded 'cult of personality'.
We, too, will be forgoing our right to vote in 2008 if it comes down to Hillary and 'other'.
GEE! I REALLY THINK THAT YOUR ATTITUDE IS NEGATIVE TO SAY THE LEAST. AS YOU KNOW NAFTA WAS INHERITED BY CLINTON FROM THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION...YOUR ATTITUDE DOESN'T HELP IN ANY WAY THE STRUGGLE FOR SOCIAL JUSTICE. THINK IT OVER...
bravo! exactly what i have been saying all along. much as i would like to see a woman lead this country, i say loud & clear -- NOT THIS PARTICULAR WOMAN. mark my words. the dems will be the ultimate losers if they front her as the candidate. i, too, will not vote for the first time in, well, forever.
Well, yesterday ten of the SEIU's state councils -- a total of almost a million working men and women -- threw their support to Edwards. You'd think The NY Times -- after talking up all that bad news for Edwards -- would do a story on this, right? NOPE
The investment elites who profit from globalization and the global auction for American jobs brought about by NAFTA back Hilary.A president who supports labor and the working class is their biggest nightmare
You read the comments and blogs here and practically everywhere else and you begin to wonder if the greatest disservice that Bush has done to America is to lower our standards.
I hope we don't get lost in our conclusion that ANYBODY is preferable to someone like Bush and vote another one of Mammon's worshippers in.
(I'm in danger of getting religion through the back door of "Well I can't deny all the evil I'm seeing, so maybe they have something..." Except most of the evil seems to be coming from people that keep preaching religion.)
Electing Hillary Clinton in 2008 will be as detrimental to the security and well-being of the working men and women of this country as the (faux) election of George W. Bush was in 2000.
WAKE UP, PEOPLE!
Instead of reading or watching or listening to the moronic pundits of the MSM, it's time to consider the ongoing damage being done to this country by the corporate-friendly NAFTA and CAFTA bills signed into law by Hillary's husband, Bill.
At this very moment, you are sitting before the greatest informational tool ever devised by man...the computer. The knowledge you will need to make an informed decision is literally at your fingertips.
Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting - FAIR
MEDIA MATTERS
CorpWatch
The Guardian
The answers are all out there.
You need only care enough to look for them.
And Mudcat, my friend, EXCELLENT BLOG!
About time somebody threw some cold water on the Hillary conflagration.
From experience I know the car dealer who pushes
you to buy a certain car and refuses to show you
why its a good buy, tells you you can't take it
to your own mechanic....well he's selling you a
load of crap. Works in politics too.
She's got bucks
She's got Bush
She wants pow-wwwwer
Whoa whoa whoa
She's a laaa-ady
Ron Paul understands economics and monetary policy better than 99.9999% of the population of America.
The "managed" part of "free trade" is where the corporations wield their power. Who do you think does the managing? You? Me? It's the corporations. When you do central planning of an economy, the people with the money and the power do the planning TO THEIR BENEFIT.
Our monetary/economic system, as it is, disempowers the poor and middle class and sereptitiously steals our money and transfers it to the wealthy. More government spending that requires more borrowing and creating money out of thin air only exacerbates the problem.
Our current system is unsustainable and we are on the verge of massive inflation which will completely destroy the middle class.
Oh well, I guess the Feds will just create a "jobs" program and make it all better.
I love it when her hubby says, "She's the most qualified person I've ever had a chance to vote for in over 40 years." Huh? Whatever Bill. He has the greatest political skills since FDR, and a line of bullshit not seen sine Huey Long. I would fully support Mrs Clinton for Senate Majority Leader. I think she would do that job wonderfully. or, perhaps even Secretary of State. But the WhiteHouse? ain't happenin'..
Good catch, Mudcat Dave. The essence of Hillary Clinton is no accountability. Accountability isn't being "serious" to the Clintons.
She is the wife of a man who was successfully sued for sexual harassment (he paid out a settlement of over $800,000 because he knew he was going to lose) but she is running a gender based campaign as the champion of women. Thats the best example of the nonaccountability because NO ONE will raise it in the mainstream media.
Accountability is a concept with no value to the Clintons except to use against opponents.
So out of some 200 million people you have to be a Bush or a Clinton to run this country? That my friends, is a coup in sheep’s clothing.
Our two major political parties play the same game. They both kiss corporate ass and stick it to the "common people".
RON PAUL wants to dismantle the corporatocracy and the military-industrial complex. I know a lot of Democrats don't want to admit it, but the D.C. Democrats are as much in the pocket of the corporations and defense industry as the Republicans are, and Hillary Clinton is one of the worst.
If we want to start putting power back in the hands of the people, I think it's gotta be a revolutionary-type president who wants to take a blowtorch to the power structure. I don't see any viable alternative other than Ron Paul.
Reading this I discover our only choices are Clinton, Edwards, or Paul and Kucinich, with perhaps a word about Richardson and .. Nader?
Are Biden and Dodd so completely out of the picture? Why? Too mainstream..ie, electable?
Too loaded with baggage?..ie, experienced?
Too controversial?. so controversial they aren't even discussed??
Not controversial enough??
Are we just waiting for them to raise enough money so they can be taken seriously...then dismiss them for having raised too much money??
Full discloser; I like Biden. Many of my friends do, but all seem to imagine he has no chance. Why? Polls? Nobody has asked us??
NAFTA is the issue!! It was Bill's baby and Hillary will do nothing to stop it or alter it or mitigate its effects. The working men and women need to get this and get this fast. Obama needs to begin to attack her on this issue. I don't know why suddenly everyone on this blog has counted him out. Everyone is accepting the inevitability of Hilary that the media is ramming down our throats. Especailly since not even one vote has been cast. He has the most complete, well-thought out strategies for all the important issues facing America. Hilary will have you forced to pay for health care that you cannot afford or else lose your job. She's a fascist, hawk, play by the old-boy rules gal, who will not push forward a feminist agenda. (For all you women who want a woman president: Jane Fonda said of her, "We don't want a ventriloquist for patriarchy with a vagina and a skirt." But to get back to NAFTA, that, coupled with Clinton throwing women and children off welfare, making them work for minimum wage jobs, has created two generations of hopeless poverty and filled the prisons to the highest level in America's history and in the world. More poor people were imprisoned during Clinton's administration than any other. Now , he's all set to become the nation's foreign ambassador to the world (She hasn't even won yet--the arrogance). Well, he can just go to China, India and other countries who have got all of our jobs because of his NAFTA, which he pushed instead of health care. How do you like doing better over there, workers? Our workers are doing worse!! Will the candidates have the guts to challenge her on this!!! Obama 08
How can you rail (correctly) against NAFTA and then say you are supporting Obama! Kucinich is
the only one who has pledged to end nafta his first day. Also Kucinich is the only one who has a real unuiversal health care plan without insurance companies sucking up all the money, Obama is still seeking to keep insurance companies making money by denying coverage. Gee, think maybe thats why hes gotten so much insuance money.Kucinich is
the one with spine, balls and vision.
I do. She want to conquor the world on the backs of our military just to show how 'tough' she is.
The only real question to ask for this next election is whether you would allow your children to drink water which had trace-amounts of Hillary in it.
John Hofer
Mudcat - I'm willing to give HC a chance. Beats what we have now. Nothing indicates she won't be able to do a helluva lot better.
She already knows the system. Promise them everything and after shes elected she will follow her own agenda we can not afford four more years of Clinton.either one ,shes a shape shifter do you think for one minute she will do anything she promises to do? big drug/insurance has already bought and paid for her as with most of our elected officials. ever read the second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence? maybe it will work today as well.
Julileegal: Better than what? The Clinton agenda IS the Bush/Cheney agenda. They belong to the same exclusive club. They've sold out to the same corporatist interests.
Hillary Clinton is (H.W.) Bush with lipstick.
The only way out of this hell is Kucinich or Paul. Everyone else (even Gravel, Edwards, and Gore, weep) is a globalist, an agent tasked to roll in what conspiracy theorists (and George H.W. Bush, Gary Hart, and hundreds among the elite) openly call the "New World Order:" One authoritarian (fascist) world government and one world currency. Ruled (yes ruled) by them, of course. That's what fascists do: RULE with no checks or balances.
Bill Clinton is on-board with the One World Government scam against the world's citizens. So is Hillary. Any CFR member, regardless of how well-meaning they may be - is in on the scam.
Kucinich and Paul are the only ones who are not.
our next president has to do more than beat what we have now. that's a pretty low bar. i want our president to excel greatly (which won't take much) over GWB.
The medical, drug and insurance industries fought her back in '93-'94. They are now her largest contributors. Why? What has changed? Read her present health care proposal. It gives each of those industries significantly more money. Whose money?
She says that she now better understands how the system works. She certainly does. Spending a few hours one day following a nurse around does not equate to an understanding of the financial burden and the suffering those industries have put on the backs of the American people, whether they have insurance or not.
Working the system and working for the people are not the same. They are, in fact, mutually exclusive.
She'll only be more of the same of what we already have, and we need to take back our country from the likes of the neo-cons.
and not hand it over to the neo-libs
The Movie Sicko comes to mind if you don't like michael moore thats your choice but, after this movie makes you angry, and brings you to tears you will see politics in a different light...i promise...
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
